USA Politics

I think this just sealed Trump’s loss. Flipping another Supreme Court seat conservative is something Republicans would love to see, but there are few things you could do to motivate left-of-center voters to the polls more than telling them they’re staring down the reality of a 6-3 conservative court or worse, plus a probable overturning of Roe v Wade.
 
Murkowski and Collins are reported as saying they wouldn’t vote on a nominee before the election (with Collins saying she also wouldn’t vote during the lame duck). There are also recent comments from Grassley (who heads the judiciary) and Graham saying the same rules in 2016 apply in 2020. I’m not holding my breath.

I don’t think this will be the done deal many think it is though. There are at least four vulnerable senators who will be affected by this decision, and they have different political risks here. For Collins and Gardner, they risk firing up an already hostile blue state constituency. For McSally and Thillis, the risk is bringing in someone too moderate and depressing red turnout in very close swing states. You probably can’t please both groups. With those things in mind, plus Murkowski probably not voting before an election, McConnell isn’t going to have the votes. Besides, making SCOTUS an election issue could turn the tide for republicans. It certainly worked in 2016.

The real question is what happens after Election Day. Republicans have until Jan 3 to confirm a new justice, assuming they lose the senate. Collins, Gardner, Thillis, and McSally could easily vote in a new justice on their way out.

The last thing to keep in mind is that there is a MAD element here. This years SCOTUS session really took the wind out of the pro court-packing sails on the left when both of Trump’s picks crossed the line on some pretty important decisions. It proved the court still had some legitimacy and, until now, ensured that SCOTUS reform probably wouldn’t be an agenda item for democrats. Now, if the GOP rams through a heritage foundation pick, Biden has no choice but to pack the court as soon as he gets into office. Or some other reform. That will certainly play into the political calculus between now and January.
 
Jer said:
I think this just sealed Trump’s loss. Flipping another Supreme Court seat conservative is something Republicans would love to see, but there are few things you could do to motivate left-of-center voters to the polls more than telling them they’re staring down the reality of a 6-3 conservative court or worse, plus a probable overturning of Roe v Wade.
Click to expand...

on the flip, Evangelicals in swing states such as Colorado (Colorado Springs has a healthy Evangelical population) and Pennsylvania could use this passing to inspire off again/on again lapsed voters to rush to the polls in the hopes of limiting the scope of Roe.
 
Last edited:
Mitch would rather trigger his nuclear option now and worry about fighting away the Dems nuclear option. Besides, this is what he's thinking:

1) Get a conservative flunky on the court.
2) Dems win the trifecta.
3) Dems blow away the filibuster - fight that.
4) Dems pass a court packing bill - sue over that.
5) SCOTUS rules 6-3 that court packing bill is unconstitutional because reasons.

5a737e2f93787.image.jpg
 
On a serious note. a conservative friend of mine is worried about the dems throwing out the fillibuster and packing the courts and I told him he is being short sighted as that can eventually favor republicans as well.
 
McSally is a yes, Romney is a no.

Of course any of these no’s can be changed if Trump nominated the right person.
 
Mosh said:
Of course any of these no’s can be changed if Trump nominated the right person.
Click to expand...
Y’know, it would be a stroke of genius if Trump put up Merrick Garland. He’d never do it in a million years, but imagine the reaction if he did. And it’d be so close to the election that it might actually swing undecideds his way if he looked like he was trying to heal a divide for a change.
 
Onhell said:
On a serious note. a conservative friend of mine is worried about the dems throwing out the fillibuster and packing the courts and I told him he is being short sighted as that can eventually favor republicans as well.
Click to expand...
I think the Dems are going to go for the full monty.
Kill the filibuster, admit DC and Puerto Rico, pass redistricting and voting rights rules. Put the GOP into the minority their vote share suggests they have.
 
LooseCannon said:
I think the Dems are going to go for the full monty.
Kill the filibuster, admit DC and Puerto Rico, pass redistricting and voting rights rules. Put the GOP into the minority their vote share suggests they have.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, if they do that the Republicans will file tons of law suits to try to stop them, and eventually some of those suits will make their way up to a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court for a final decision.
 
Jer said:
Unfortunately, if they do that the Republicans will file tons of law suits to try to stop them, and eventually some of those suits will make their way up to a 6-3 conservative Supreme Court for a final decision.
Click to expand...
LooseCannon said:
Mitch would rather trigger his nuclear option now and worry about fighting away the Dems nuclear option. Besides, this is what he's thinking:

1) Get a conservative flunky on the court.
2) Dems win the trifecta.
3) Dems blow away the filibuster - fight that.
4) Dems pass a court packing bill - sue over that.
5) SCOTUS rules 6-3 that court packing bill is unconstitutional because reasons.

5a737e2f93787.image.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Collins is publicly saying that the next president should pick the judge. That’s 3 presumable no’s, Dems only need one more to stall the vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top